Just now, rtodepart said:

I think if ******* himself was reading some of this threads he probably asked himself 

why are waves sooo important on a FLIGHT SIMULATOR ??? 

They are probably not.

But Asobo has been bending over backwards to please, and consequently seems to be getting it from both ends.

One faction asks for a change and Asobo obliges.

Another faction screams bloody murder and demands a reversion to the previous..... whatever.

Eventually Asobo will begin locking things down to what they find both pleasing, and doable and will begin ignoring the seething sea of contrary requests.

Because as its said: You can't please everybody.

It may be insane to even try.

I hope Bill Gates is losing sleep over this .

Re the waves or lack thereof Ive already voted at the appropriate forum. I dont have an issue with the appearance of the waves when its windy. I just dont think they have accounted for the appearance when the surface wind is calm yet your out in the open ocean... And after just completing a test flight in the Neo where the AP just veered me off course from the flightplan (coincidentally after opening the vfr map) Not saying it caused it or not.. will have to test again and the speed display switching to mach  at some point in the descent (with me unable to switch it back) I still come to the conclusion that Asobo is not impressing me with their approach or their actual output. But that is just me and my opinion. Not here to convince anyone.. 

 

Ill leave it at that.

Edited October 15, 20205 yr by Maxis

9 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

 

Because as its said: You can't please everybody.

It may be insane to even try.

 

Well you can but you end up with a bit of software with so many configuration options no-one can work out how to drive it.

TBH Microsoft are sort of guilty of that quite often, MS Office is a case in point, hence the old joke that if MS designed a bicycle it would have an airbus cockpit attached to the handlebars and refuse to allow you to pedal manually in case you stuffed it up.

21 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Because as its said: You can't please everybody.

I goes beyond that.  If you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.
 

22 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Eventually Asobo will begin locking things down to what they find both pleasing, and doable and will begin ignoring the seething sea of contrary requests.

This is what they should have been doing from the beginning.  If someone wants something different, they can buy a third party addon to provide it.

This affects me as well.  I want more control over the real world weather than what Asobo will be offering.  I have no problems buying Active Sky to give me the weather enhancements I prefer.  Because additional control over the weather is something I'm willing to pay for.  As always, your mileage may vary.  Not everyone will need it.

I'm not advocating Asobo totally ignore the market, just that they make the best flight simulator they can.  And make it flexible enough that third parties can enhance it.

Hook

17 hours ago, 177B said:

The problem with open BETAs is that so many users have messed up systems and lots of questionable mods. As well as added 3rd party stuff in the mix. Not to mention bad or intermittent internet connections.

So what happens is the developer will be inundated with problem reports that have nothing to do with their software.

I have a dedicated computer for simming, no other games or apps. Only sim apps and their known good 3rd party additions.

I have not really had any big problems with FS2020. Just the obvious ones that have now been fixed or have work arounds. Continuous on switches on the Honeycomb yoke comes to mind, causing the 10 degree increments and avionics clicking off. A few others like the VFR map bug and the USB disconnect CTD, fixed in the first update.

I am having a fantastic time playing with they new sim. I have barely used XP at all since FS2020 launch. I am enjoying making Air Manager work, and use a 4 screen system with great frame rate.

I have never seen a developer be as open and responsive as ASOBO. I think they are doing a fantastic job. This is a completely new sim so I am amazed it works as well as it does. Even Apple has lots of bugs to fix every time there is an update, not to mention MS with new Windows SW. It is the same with CAD/CAM software as well. It is just the nature of the beast.

So IMHO I think ASOBO is doing it right with closed in-house BETA and then frequent updates. It is a refreshing way to do complex development.

No....that is the purpose of testing.  The people you are refering to are the users, not the small elite group who have their own dedicated computer and think theirs is the only way to fly.

52 minutes ago, rtodepart said:

 

why are waves sooo important on a FLIGHT SIMULATOR ??? 

Realistic waves (Direction, strength) are nice to have for those of us flying low in lake countries (Alaska for instance) for water landing or ground landing without windsock. As is vegetation bending in the wind by the way. 

Also it is a important component of eye candy immersion  for sceneries, like trees for instance. The better they look/act, the better is the immersion.

MSF predecessors were sorely lacking in the wave department. The new sim wants to be the next gen VFR sim so we expect better waves. Simple.

 

 

1 hour ago, rtodepart said:

I think if the guy up there watching us  was reading some of this threads he probably asked himself 

why are waves sooo important on a FLIGHT SIMULATOR ??? 

If flying VFR they are very signifigent.  the presence or absence of whitecaps indicate windspeed and the wave direction indicates wind direction.  What is unimportant to one does mean it is so for others.

Just now, harrry said:

If flying VFR they are very signifigent.  the presence or absence of whitecaps indicate windspeed and the wave direction indicates wind direction.  What is unimportant to one does mean it is so for others.

So the question that immediately comes to mind is: How have we gotten by, all of these years without these whitecaps?

Because, obviously we did so and survived.

My point is, that I feel there's a certain aspect of insatiability, even greed, to our demands at this point. As if we're just absolutely determined to push and push for more and more, unable to stop ourselves until Asobo/Microsoft finally loses patience (and/or reaches the end of its budget) and finally says ENOUGH!

I think if I was asobo, I would right about now be having planning sessions regarding the maximum scope of what I intended to accomplish, and final goals.

Because if they let the community drive the goals, we'll eventually have individually identifiable ants raiding picnic tables in camping spots. And somebody will complain that the ants antennas are unrealistic.

 

Maybe that is why FSX beccame more a procedural sim than a VFR one.  This one has beeen largely sold as a VFR platform, and in other media sold as the best sim ever.  If you promise thed world that is what you have to sell

Red or black ants ?

 

I'd settle for pedestrians around where pedestrians would be.. stadiums , beaches. whatever.

But I am totally fine without them.  Maybe some tractors  all those green fields and no in them.

lol.....

 

Just now, AmeliaCat said:

Red or black ants ?

 

I'd settle for pedestrians around where pedestrians would be.. stadiums , beaches. whatever.

But I am totally fine without them.  Maybe some tractors  all those green fields and no in them.

lol.....

 

I fly to get away from people but all those empty marinas in the Carabeean do not seem right

consensus.....really?, probably will never happen.

17 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

So the question that immediately comes to mind is: How have we gotten by, all of these years without these whitecaps?

Because, obviously we did so and survived.

My point is, that I feel there's a certain aspect of insatiability, even greed, to our demands at this point. As if we're just absolutely determined to push and push for more and more, unable to stop ourselves until Asobo/Microsoft finally loses patience (and/or reaches the end of its budget) and finally says ENOUGH!

I think if I was asobo, I would right about now be having planning sessions regarding the maximum scope of what I intended to accomplish, and final goals.

Because if they let the community drive the goals, we'll eventually have individually identifiable ants raiding picnic tables in camping spots. And somebody will complain that the ants antennas are unrealistic.

 

I'm with you on this one...

I also think that Asobo/MS should be concentrating on the basics and the SDK's

Flight simmers are very diverse in their wishes and desires, and no single program will ever fulfill all those requiirements..  that is why in all other sims there has been such a high level of 3rd party support.. to cater for the edge cases.

MSFS has a wonderful base, which needs fleshing out in a few aspects, for going forward..  and basic SDK's which also need expanding in some cases.

Asobo and MS said from the get-go that this sim would still support 3rd party devs, but the requests they are getting are pushing them beyond this basic premise...  

Make the base, the best it can be AS A BASE, and then make sure the SDK allows for 3rd party to come in and add to that functionality for the edge cases.

Currently,  the basics are becoming more solid..  but I do worry when they state that they will change their minds on things like the Garmin functionality...   If the SDK is solid..  any 3rd party dev can add that as we have seen from sterling work done by the current users.  We have been shown that the existing flight model and aircraft can be modified and made even more functionally solid with things like the Bonanza Turbo...we have seen companies getting involved so that Basic ground systems can be looked at by companies such as GFX for future enhancements etc.

I would recommend to MS Asobo that they should concentrate on four things from what they have today....

1)  Get the SDK's to be really solid and access all aspects of the sim as a matter of urgency..

2)  Work with as many 3rd Party people as possible for enhancements to basics

3)  Continue with the base scenery updates like the Japan update and push forward on new basic functionality that they are alluding to with their DLC's  such as Helichopper and glider enhancements.

4)  Work on getting the best performance/upgrade capabilities/install etc for the BASIC functions they have included.

Regards

 

Graham

 

 

2 hours ago, Moria15 said:

I would recommend to MS Asobo that they should concentrate on four things from what they have today....

1)  Get the SDK's to be really solid and access all aspects of the sim as a matter of urgency..

2)  Work with as many 3rd Party people as possible for enhancements to basics

3)  Continue with the base scenery updates like the Japan update and push forward on new basic functionality that they are alluding to with their DLC's  such as Helichopper and glider enhancements.

4)  Work on getting the best performance/upgrade capabilities/install etc for the BASIC functions they have included.

This is spot on. Get this right and I believe that most of the negative comments and complaints will go away. I would add, that they need to get JUST the basics right and 3PDs will do the rest. It will be a minority who will stay with the fixed default aircraft and scenery and if fixed, they too will be very happy.  Updates will eventually fix our concerns and I find it hard to dispute that MSFS/Asobo are in it for the 10 year plan at least. 

With the 4 recommended actions being actioned, can you imagine what MS2030 will be like.  I can't

Tony